torture is okay?
Posted: 16 Dec 2005, 12:33
Wonderful.
I wonder how many of those would support the use of torture if it was them being tortured?
Page 1 of 2
Posted: 16 Dec 2005, 12:44
Posted: 16 Dec 2005, 12:48
Torture is only ok between consenting adults.... 
Posted: 16 Dec 2005, 13:32
Interrogation okay and there are different styles.
But what is torture?
Is not allowing someone to sleep for a day torturing?
Is one glas of water and a small piece of bread a day torturing?
No toiletpaper; is that torturing?
So what do these people mean when they say they agree?
But what is torture?
Is not allowing someone to sleep for a day torturing?
Is one glas of water and a small piece of bread a day torturing?
No toiletpaper; is that torturing?
So what do these people mean when they say they agree?
Posted: 16 Dec 2005, 14:44
Firstly, I agree with Gottdammerung. 
Secondly, I take they think torture is continuous infliction of physical pain until the tortured gives the information the torturer wants, when they're agreeing with it. That's the first thing that always pops into my head when I hear the word torture. Of course, there are worse forms of torture, such as sexual torture.
Secondly, I take they think torture is continuous infliction of physical pain until the tortured gives the information the torturer wants, when they're agreeing with it. That's the first thing that always pops into my head when I hear the word torture. Of course, there are worse forms of torture, such as sexual torture.
Posted: 16 Dec 2005, 15:44
It's like Room 101 - something different for every individual.Ozpat wrote:Interrogation okay and there are different styles.
But what is torture?
Is not allowing someone to sleep for a day torturing?
Is one glas of water and a small piece of bread a day torturing?
No toiletpaper; is that torturing?
So what do these people mean when they say they agree?
Stick me in a room with 50 Cent playing on a loop and I'll tell you anything you want to hear.
Posted: 16 Dec 2005, 15:51
That's my point.boudicca wrote:It's like Room 101 - something different for every individual.Ozpat wrote:Interrogation okay and there are different styles.
But what is torture?
Is not allowing someone to sleep for a day torturing?
Is one glas of water and a small piece of bread a day torturing?
No toiletpaper; is that torturing?
So what do these people mean when they say they agree?
Stick me in a room with 50 Cent playing on a loop and I'll tell you anything you want to hear.
Posted: 16 Dec 2005, 21:35
And who is allowing it?
Allegedly of course..
According to all these reports in the media about plane flights across Europe that are not mentioned..
Allegedly again..
Allegedly of course..
According to all these reports in the media about plane flights across Europe that are not mentioned..
Allegedly again..
Posted: 17 Dec 2005, 03:27
Yeah, I heard something about a Boeing 747 (belonging to the CIA) at Glasgow Airport which had been doing the rounds in the middle east, dropping off terrorist suspects. NiceZuma wrote:And who is allowing it?
Allegedly of course..
According to all these reports in the media about plane flights across Europe that are not mentioned..
Allegedly again..
.I'm sure the UN, Amnesty and various other organisations will have definitions of torture - to me, all the things Ozpat described would qualify. OK, going without sleep for a day is hardly hell on earth (if it was, maybe I could haul Quiff up in front of a UN tribunal for organising Bloktober
) but the principle of treating a suspect like this is to break him using discomfort or pain as a means of extracting your confession.Posted: 17 Dec 2005, 05:46
Same!!!!boudicca wrote:Yeah, I heard something about a Boeing 747 (belonging to the CIA) at Glasgow Airport which had been doing the rounds in the middle east, dropping off terrorist suspects. Nice :| .Zuma wrote:And who is allowing it?
Allegedly of course..
According to all these reports in the media about plane flights across Europe that are not mentioned..
Allegedly again..
I'm sure the UN, Amnesty and various other organisations will have definitions of torture - to me, all the things Ozpat described would qualify. OK, going without sleep for a day is hardly hell on earth (if it was, maybe I could haul Quiff up in front of a UN tribunal for organising Bloktober :twisted: :lol: :innocent:) but the principle of treating a suspect like this is to break him using discomfort or pain as a means of extracting your confession.
Posted: 17 Dec 2005, 09:49
There was an interesting and much debated case in Germany whether it should be allowed to vocally threat with torture in order to get hold of informations concerning the hiding-place of a kidnapped boy whose life might have been in danger. See here for more details on the Daschner case.
Posted: 17 Dec 2005, 15:29
I'd say no because, putting myself in that position, if someone was threatening me with torture ('specially if they were to detail the lovely things they'd do to me) I'd be inclined to tell them what they wanted to hear to avoid that happening.canon docre wrote:There was an interesting and much debated case in Germany whether it should be allowed to vocally threat with torture in order to get hold of informations concerning the hiding-place of a kidnapped boy whose life might have been in danger. See here for more details on the Daschner case.
Also, you can't really threaten with torture in a country that doesn't actually do it. In order for your threats to be credible you'd have to be prepared to carry them out.
Posted: 19 Dec 2005, 11:46
Psychological torture is particularly hard to define. For instance, if x drugged y, and took photos of them in a mock-up of a compromising position with a member of the same sex, then released them and said - act as our spy or we'll release the pictures - is that torture? It's a known practice in some middle-eastern countries with strong sexual taboos...
Posted: 19 Dec 2005, 13:08
Torture? I've actually bought my girlfriend the new Darkness CD for Xmas - is that self-induced?
Posted: 19 Dec 2005, 16:03
surely that would be torture only to a homophobe.MrChris wrote:Psychological torture is particularly hard to define. For instance, if x drugged y, and took photos of them in a mock-up of a compromising position with a member of the same sex, then released them and said - act as our spy or we'll release the pictures - is that torture? It's a known practice in some middle-eastern countries with strong sexual taboos...
Posted: 19 Dec 2005, 16:46
I don't think you'd have to be homophobic to strongly object to this. Even in frequently homophobic societies like Palestine (where the policy has been used successfully by the Israelis on occasion) whether the victim is homophobic or not is usually NOT the issue - the reason it's effective is because of apprehension about other peoples' reactions, to 'homosexuality' but also to adultery...
Posted: 19 Dec 2005, 17:13
I wouldnt like to get drugged and be put in a compromising situation with members of the opposite sex either.a.r.kane wrote:surely that would be torture only to a homophobe.MrChris wrote:Psychological torture is particularly hard to define. For instance, if x drugged y, and took photos of them in a mock-up of a compromising position with a member of the same sex, then released them and said - act as our spy or we'll release the pictures - is that torture? It's a known practice in some middle-eastern countries with strong sexual taboos...
Posted: 19 Dec 2005, 17:40
i dont think torture can be justified in any way!
its simply degrading and inhuman.
and i think its a shame that the CIA has been kidnapping innocent people since 2001, bringing them to Afghanistan and god knows where.
america wants to "spread democracy", the motherland of democracy, using torture to fulfil their abject aims. thats a huge discrepancy, isnt it?
its simply degrading and inhuman.
and i think its a shame that the CIA has been kidnapping innocent people since 2001, bringing them to Afghanistan and god knows where.
america wants to "spread democracy", the motherland of democracy, using torture to fulfil their abject aims. thats a huge discrepancy, isnt it?
Posted: 19 Dec 2005, 17:53
They've been doing a lot worse for a lot longer.Céleste wrote:the CIA has been kidnapping innocent people since 2001,
Posted: 19 Dec 2005, 18:28
Exactly. Homophobic or not, there's a million reasons why you might not exactly dig being forced into such a degrading situation. It's a state-sponsored sexual assault, really.canon docre wrote:I wouldnt like to get drugged and be put in a compromising situation with members of the opposite sex either.a.r.kane wrote:surely that would be torture only to a homophobe.MrChris wrote:Psychological torture is particularly hard to define. For instance, if x drugged y, and took photos of them in a mock-up of a compromising position with a member of the same sex, then released them and said - act as our spy or we'll release the pictures - is that torture? It's a known practice in some middle-eastern countries with strong sexual taboos...
I think it is the same principle as physical torture, which is fundamentally blackmail. Tell us what we want to hear (whether it's true or not) or this will happen to you...
Re: torture is okay?
Posted: 19 Dec 2005, 22:43
The only good thing about that statement is that around 70 per cent didn't support the use of torture
Posted: 20 Dec 2005, 11:09
Of course torture is OK. There's a war on, remember. We have to do something, regardless of whether it's actually effective or ethical.
The stunning lack of Heartland Realpolitik strikes again .....
The stunning lack of Heartland Realpolitik strikes again .....
Posted: 20 Dec 2005, 11:12
Pulls out the pin, throws and runs away...
Posted: 21 Dec 2005, 14:19
I'm not surprised by the amount of Americans who agree with torture... America has it's own rules.
It reminds me of a paper by William Blum:
“No matter how paranoid you are, what the government is actually doing is worse than you imagine.”
“Don’t believe anything until it’s been officially
denied." (Gulf War syndrome, anyone?)
It's true with Elections (Bulgaria, Chile), the War on Drugs, War on Terror , Human Rights.
Of course, they DO care about Human Rights... it's just flexible, not a fundamental 'law' or goal.
Read the paper by William Blum, "U.S. Foreign Policy -- A Study in Hypocrisy".
But i'm scared at the fact that so many 'non american' countries agree on torture.
It reminds me of a paper by William Blum:
“No matter how paranoid you are, what the government is actually doing is worse than you imagine.”
“Don’t believe anything until it’s been officially
denied." (Gulf War syndrome, anyone?)
It's true with Elections (Bulgaria, Chile), the War on Drugs, War on Terror , Human Rights.
Of course, they DO care about Human Rights... it's just flexible, not a fundamental 'law' or goal.
Read the paper by William Blum, "U.S. Foreign Policy -- A Study in Hypocrisy".
But i'm scared at the fact that so many 'non american' countries agree on torture.
Posted: 21 Dec 2005, 14:44
andymackem wrote:Of course torture is OK. There's a war on, remember. We have to do something, regardless of whether it's actually effective or ethical.
The stunning lack of Heartland Realpolitik strikes again .....
I can never quite work out whether you're a cynic or a realist.Come to think of it, is there a difference?